Will our global obligations survive the anti-globalisation movement?

How can it be financed?

Prudent, affluent people take out insurance cover for their home, medical expenses and perhaps income protection and superannuation. The deserving poor are entitled to similar assistance, but lack the wherewithall. Both groups could obtain the same defined cover from the proposed new institution.

All members, rich and poor, could pay a regular amount depending on their circumstances. Those who can afford it pay a premium or subscription that covers the expected cost of services to themselves plus an extra tithe, like a commission, which is a tax-deductible donation.

Donations from members, corporations, governments, and philanthropic institutions could be added to an investment fund and the income from the fund used solely to support the needy members, by subsidizing their premiums, perhaps heavily. The fund can also support shareholder activism.

The admission of members must be controlled so that the organisation is not swamped by demand from the needy, and strategies would be required to prevent "free loaders".

Initial service delivery can be commercially outsourced to existing insurance, security and welfare industries.

Policy must be developed by democratic processes, involving all members - net donors and net beneficiaries. Electorates should be kept small, and members given the option to choose their electorate, regardless of geographical location, to enhance their ability to have representatives they actually support.

Who would support such an institution - other than the needy?

There are many philanthropists and ordinary altruistic people who would contribute. The passion shown by anti-globalisation demonstrators is evidence of a widespread need. The success of this concept is dependent not only on effective marketing and the level of support from the affluent. It would also need to capture the imagination of the disaffected.

If it succeeded, even with only a fairly small minority, this "Global Obligations" institution could become commercially and politically influential. It could affect the way sovereign states see themselves and help to contain rogue corporations as much as rogue states.

Government and business need to identify and promote a new institution to counterbalance the adverse effects of globalisation in a structured, pragmatic way - to provide an alternative before nationalistic protectionism or anarchistic chaos get the upper hand.